DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS VA MEDICAL CENTER DANVILLE, ILLINOIS and LOCAL 1963, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO

United States of America

BEFORE THE FEDERAL SERVICE IMPASSES
PANEL

In the Matter of

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

VA MEDICAL CENTER

DANVILLE, ILLINOIS

and

LOCAL 1963, AMERICAN FEDERATION

OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO

Case No. 93 FSIP 159

DECISION AND ORDER

Local 1963, American Federation
of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (Union) filed a request for assistance with the
Federal Service Impasses Panel (Panel) to consider a negotiation impasse under
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute), 5 U.S.C.
§ 7119, between it and the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Medical Center,
Danville, Illinois (Employer).

After investigation of the
request for assistance, the Panel directed the parties to participate in a
telephone conference with Staff Associate Gladys M. Hernandez for the purpose of
resolving their dispute over the alternative work schedule (AWS) to be worked by
certain employees of the Psychology Service's Inpatient Substance Abuse Program
(ISAP).(1) The parties were advised that if no settlement were reached,
Ms. Hernandez would report to the Panel on the status of the dispute,
including the parties' final offers, and her recommendations for resolving the
impasse. After considering this information, the Panel would take whatever
action it deemed appropriate to resolve the impasse, including the issuance of a
binding decision.

Ms. Hernandez held a telephone
conference with the parties on August 17, 1993, but to no avail. She has
reported to the Panel based on the record developed by the parties, and it has
now considered the entire record.

BACKGROUND

The Employer's mission is to
provide quality medical care to eligible veterans and their beneficiaries. The
Union represents approximately 1,276 employees in 2 separate bargaining units.
The unit concerned in this dispute is made up of approximately 930 General
Schedule (GS), Wage Grade, and "hybrid" employees.(2) The dispute centers
on three GS-9 psychology technicians (PT)(3) who are currently working 4/10 work
schedules with rotating days off.(4) A newly hired GS-9 PT and three GS-6
rehabilitation technicians (RT) are already working a regular schedule (5 days
per week, 8 hours per day), including weekends. The parties are covered by
2-year local and 3-year national collective-bargaining agreements negotiated in
1977 and 1982, respectively, which have been rolled over annually since their
original terms expired. The dispute arose during negotiations over modifications
to the June 4, 1989, AWS Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) covering all of the
Psychology Service, initiated by the Employer pursuant to paragraph 1.a. of that
MOU.(5)

ISSUE AT IMPASSE

The parties disagree over whether the three PTs
should remain on 4/10 work schedules.

POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

1. The Employer's
Position

While it would prefer that all employees work a
regular (5 days per week, 8 hours per day) schedule, as a compromise, the
Employer proposes that the three PTs work a 5-4/9 AWS with fixed days off;
selection from among the designated days off (first or second Monday or first
Friday in a biweekly pay period) would be based on seniority. Their 9-hour days
would begin at 7:30 a.m. and end at 5 p.m., while their 8-hour day would begin
at 8 a.m. and end at 4:30 p.m. The other ISAP employees, a fourth PT(6) and two RTs,
would work 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, including weekends, from 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. A third RT would continue to work 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, including
weekends, and split his or her time between ISAP (noon to 4 p.m.) and the
outpatient program (4 to 8:30 p.m.).

In 1989, a "reorganization and resource
constraints" led to the loss of 24-hour nursing coverage for the inpatient
program. At that time, it agreed to permit day tour PTs to work 4/10 schedules
with rotating days off and fixed days off for those reassigned to a recently
created midnight tour "in order to keep ISAP in operation and assure
24-hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week coverage." Problems arose immediately,
however. Specifically, PTs were unavailable to provide counselling and to
conduct program group activities, which led to a number of patient complaints.(7)
With the recent increase in funding and staffing, including physicians, a
physician's assistant, and nurses for 24-hour coverage, PTs are no longer needed
to provide supervision of patients outside of the time frame in which group
activities are scheduled (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.). "Strengthening treatment
and quality of care" has once again "assumed priority." Its
proposal would accomplish this objective better than the Union's because PTs
would work 10 or 11 days of the 18-day program, as compared with 8 or 9, thereby
increasing their availability for counselling patients and conducting group
activities.

2. The Union's
Position

The Union proposes that the three PTs continue to
work a 4/10 AWS but with fixed rather than rotating days off.(8) Two of them would
work from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., and the third from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. As for the
other ISAP employees, three RTs would work 5 days a week, 8 hours a day,
including weekends, from 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 8 a.m to 4:30 p.m., or noon to
8:30 p.m. The individual hired to fill an unspecified vacant position would work
Sunday through Thursday, 8 hours per day.(9)

Generally, the 4/10 AWS has proved to be a
"significant morale booster" for PTs during the recent period of
"stressful changes" in the program, including increased workload. The
problems with the current schedule are due to the PTs having rotating days off,
not because they work 4/10 schedules. Fixed days off would reduce the number of
cancellations of group activities by: (1) allowing management to revise
patients' schedules to "show the groups meeting only at the times they are
actually planned to occur;" and (2) improving PTs' coverage of group
activities when those scheduled to conduct them are absent. Also, fixed days off
would virtually do away with the counselor unavailability problem, which
"typically" occurred during long weekends at the end of rotation
cycles. This problem, however, will continue to some extent regardless of work
schedules if management continues to assign patients to PTs immediately before
they are scheduled to go on vacation. Moreover, its proposed schedule would
allow the Employer to go forward with planned program enhancements. For example,
with the careful selection of fixed days off, the Employer could increase the
number of ESM group sections (which focus on rational self-analysis training)
from 1 to 3, the number of employees leading each of those sections to 2, and
the frequency with which they meet. Finally, 4/10 schedules permit PT
availability outside of the group activities period (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.),
enhancing individual counselling sessions by increasing interaction between PTs
and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Having evaluated the proposed
schedules in light of the evidence and arguments presented, we shall order the
parties to adopt the Employer's because, in our view, it balances the equities
involved more effectively. Preliminarily, we note that the establishment of 4/10
work schedules for the three PTs in question occurred during a period of funding
and staffing shortages which no longer exist. We are persuaded, on the basis of
the record, that a 5-4/9 schedule should continue to provide the PTs with
sufficient flexibility in their work schedules without sacrificing the
Employer's ability to effect real changes to a program aimed at helping veterans
overcome drug and/or alcohol abuse, a prevalent problem in society. In this
regard, we agree with the Employer that requiring them to work an additional day
every pay period would increase the total number of days during the course of
the program in which they are present and, therefore, their availability for
counselling patients. The PTs should also be available during more hours when
program group activities are held, thereby facilitating efforts in correcting
the ongoing problems concerning their cancellation, as well as enhancing them.
Finally, we are not convinced that these same benefits would result from simply
fixing the employees' off days under the 4/10 AWS.

ORDER

Pursuant to the authority vested
in it by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. §
7119, and because of the failure of the parties to resolve their dispute during
the course of proceedings instituted pursuant to the Panel's regulations, 5
C.F.R. § 2471.6 (a)(2), the Federal Service Impasses Panel under § 2471.11(a)
of its regulations hereby orders the following: